Peter Eyland (epe@newt.phys.unsw.edu.au)
Thu, 24 Oct 1996 12:19:17 +1000

>since no-one can make an image of the invisible

To comment on a different aspect:
There are many examples of *images of the invisible*. If invisible
means not able to be seen with the naked eye. Atomic force
microscopes make images of individual atoms whose size is less
than the wavelengths of visible light. In the movies *silence of the
lambs*, and the one with Harrison Ford and the Irish terrorists,
the villains used night vision equipment to image what otherwise
couldn't be seen.

In the episode:
When Jesus held up the coin and said "Whose EIKWN and
inscription is this?"

I would take it that the response to this, by those present at the time,
was not just an intellectual recognition of visual likeness.
It was an existential apprehension of the reality of the presence and
power of the imperator. (Not physically of course, coin usage defined
the extent of the ruler's authority.)

The modern perception can be illustrated if I may subvert William
James' language, (ie this is not an actual quote from the famous
American psychologist), *create the image and the reality will follow*.

However the methodology of Christianity is different from this.
It starts with the existential apprehension that the indwelling Spirit
has created the reality of the presence and power of God and this
results in behaviour consistent with that *image*.